On 11-05-2022 07:39, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 5/10/2022 9:43 PM, smitra wrote:
On 11-05-2022 06:01, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:51 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote:
On 09-05-2022 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Such models are certainly inconsistent with the SE. So if your
concern
is that the SE does not contain provision for a collapse, then you
should doubt other theories that violate the SE. You can't have it
both ways: you can't reject collapse models because they violate
the
SE and then embrace other models that also violate the SE. Either
the
SE is universally correct, or it is not.
What matters is that such models can be
formulated in a mathematically consistent way, which demonstrates
that
there is n o contradiction. The physical plausibility of such
models
is another issue.
This has been discussed. To allow for real number probabilities,
the
number of branches on each split must be infinite. The measure
problem
for infinite numbers of branches has not been solved. It is
unlikely
that any consistent measure over infinite numbers of branches can
be
defined. So this idea is probably a non-starter. At least other
models
have a reasonable chance of success.
As Brent has also pointed out, there amount of information in the
visible universe is finite.
That does not limit the number of branches. A finite universe does
not
limit the number of points in a line.
There is no such thing as a mathematical continuum in the real
physical world. There are only a finite number of distinct quantum
states available for a finite universe. This is clear for states below
some total energy E. But there is an upper limit to the total energy
due to gravitational collapse when the energy exceeds a certain limit.
But one can also consider observers and then
each observer has a some finite memory so there are only a finite
number
of branches the observer can distinguish between.
That does not follow.
If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can be
in, then that's also true for observers.
So what does the SE for this discrete universe look like? The one
every cites assumes a continuum. If the universe is finite then
there's smallest non-zero probability, which as Bruce says, raises
some problems.
You then have a finite set of states with transition probabilities for
transitions between the states.
Saibal
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/baa1576b0e09664ce40375c604843930%40zonnet.nl.
